Skip to main content

About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
a more effective version. as we carry on george w. bush's policies. on israel i think some of the romney charges are accurate. the fact is that the president has gratuitously alienated the prime minister of israel on an issue frankly was not relevant, which was settlements. and i don't think, unlike bill clinton, and george w. bush, that this president has the kind of emotional sensitivity that think is required to create some measure of partnership with the israelis even though netanyahu is a difficult guy. on syria, look, let's be clear. we're coming off the two longest wars in american history. the last thing we need is another military adventure that isn't thought through very clearly. on iran, no matter who is president we have got big trouble coming. israelis rightly need to figure out a way to prevent iran from enriching uranium. the question is, whether or not you can do that short of war? and right now, neither barack obama nor mitt romney, nor benjamin netanyahu have answers to that. so --. >> brought us through some very important regions in the middle east and it is such a bi
of approaching. you think back to george w. bush when the whole war on terror started and there was always talk about what a tough battle this was going to be for the rest of our lifetimes basically. and sort of admitting that up fronts, but that the efforts were diligent to make sure that we were going to continue to combat this war on terror. it's almost as if right now 36 days before the election, you don't really want to talk about that side of it, that there might be a reinsurgentence now of equaled, even though osama bin laden is dead. there might still be a resurgence of al-qaeda. >> eric: last night on "60 minutes," there was a fantastic piece on interviewing president karzai from afghanistan and also our general boots on the ground in afghanistan, they have a little bit different take on where al-qaeda is. take a listen. >> al-qaeda has come back. al-qaeda is a resilient organization. but they're not here in large numbers. but al-qaeda doesn't have to be anywhere in large numbers. >> the reason for the nato and american intervention in afghanistan was terrorism. terrorism has not gone
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)